Vineet Kothari, J.

The short, but an interesting question involved in these revision petitions is about rate of taxability of 'Multi Functional Device' sold by the Assessee-Companies, which carry out the function of scanning, photocopier fax machine and as computer printer, under the provisions of the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as 'the VAT Act') enforced within the State of Rajasthan with effect from 01.04.2006.

2. The facts have been illustratively taken from S.B. Sales Tax Revision Petition No. 21/2010 - M/s. Hewlett-Packard India Sales Pvt. v. Deputy Commissioner (Appeals)-I, Commercial Tax Department, Jaipur and anr and S.B. Sales Tax Revision Petition No. 24/2015 - M/s. Kores (India) Ltd, v. The Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Anti Evasion, Rajasthan-I, Jaipur. All these cases were heard finally at this stage by consent of both the sides.

3. All these revision petitions are pertaining to the assessment of the Assessee-Companies between the period 01.04.2006 to 09.03.2010, and arise out of the order of the learned Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer, holding against the Assessee-Companies that such Multi-Functional Devices are not Computer Printers or Computer Peripherals, taxable @ 4% under Schedule IV of the VAT Act, but are taxable, for the aforesaid period @ 12.5%/14% in the Residuary Entry of Schedule V of the said Act.

4. The Assessee-Companies collected and paid the tax on sales of the said Multi Functional Devices @ 4% in Schedule IV for the aforesaid period, whereas the Revenue demanded tax @ 12.5%/14% in the Residuary Entry for the aforesaid period. But the learned Tax Board set aside the penalty imposed on the Assessee-Companies, by the impugned orders, and therefore, as far as imposition of tax at higher rate is concerned, the Assessee-Companies felt aggrieved and filed the present revision petitions, while the Revenue filed these revision petitions, aggrieved by the deletion of penalty imposed by the Assessing Authority under Section 61 of the VAT Act, before this Court.

5. Before proceeding further, it is considered appropriate to reproduce the relevant portions of the impugned orders dated 16.09.2009 and 31.07.2015 passed by the learned Tax Board, herein below, for ready reference :-

"Order dated 16.09.2009 in Appeal No. 1576/2008/Jaipur - M/s. Hewlett-Packard India Sales Pvt. Ltd. v. Commercial Taxes Officer, Anti Evasion, Zone-II, Jaipur [STR No. 21/2010 - M/s. Hewlett-Packard India Sales Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner (Appeals)-1, Commercial Tax Department, Jaipur.]

mHk; i{k dh cgl ij euu fd;k x;k rFkk i=koyh dk voyksdu fd;k x;kA

bl izdj.k esa fookfnr fcUnq vihykFkhZ }kjk fodz; fd;s x;s ^vkWy bu ou fizUVlZ* mRikn ij dj nj ns;rk ls lEcfU/kr gSA vihykFkhZ }kjk 'Multi Functional Printers' e'khu dk eq[; Function fizafVax rFkk vfrfjDr Function Scanning, Copying & Faxing ekudj bl mRikn dks oSV vf/kfu;e dh vuqlwfp IV ds Hkkx ^,* dh dz0la0 3 ds vUrxZr doMZ ekurs gq, fcdzh dj 4 izfr'kr dh nj ls pktZ fd;k tkdj fodz; fd;k x;k gSA oSV vf/kfu;e dh vuqlwph IV ds Hkkx ^,* dh dz0la0 3 dh ,UV~h fuEu izdkj gS%&

“Computer system and peripherals, computer printers and electronic diaries.”

vihykFkhZ O;ogkjh ds fo}ku vfHkHkk"kd }kj vihykFkhZ ds mRikn ds lEcU/k esa U;kf;d n`"Vkar 1990(50)ELT 663 (Tribunal) o 1991(53) ELT A32 (SC); 2001(30) ELT 165 (Tri.Del), 2001(131) ELT 422 (Tri.Del) ,oa 2006(197) ELT 498 (Tri-Mumbai) dk gokyk nsrs gq, ;g rdZ fn;k x;k fd 'Multi Functional Machine' ds eq[; dk;Z lEiknu ,oa eq[; iz;kstu rFkk bldh External Computer ls Connectivity & capability ds vk/kkj ij dLVe foHkkx }kjk Customs Tariff Act, 1975 ds rgr residual Heading 8472.90 ds rgr as office machine ds LFkku ij computer ds input-output goods ds :i esa Heading 8471.60 ds vUrxZr vkuk vo/kkfjr fd;k x;k gSA

fo}ku vfHkHkk"kd vihykFkhZ }kjk m)fjr mDr U;kf;d n`"VkUr dLVe foHkkx }kjk fu/kkZfjr VsfjQ ds iz;kstukFkZ goods dk Customs Tariff Act, 1975 ds izko/kkuksa ds rgr oxhZdj.k fd;s tkus ls lEcfU/kr gSaA vr